Should Mom-and-Pops That Forgo Gay Weddings Be Destroyed?

Texas?! What sort of a monster do you think I am?

We’ll send 'em to Oklahoma.

The religion doesn’t. The bigots and assholes who think they are of that religion but really aren’t are the ones who need someone to shun.

Apparently, boycotts are just as bad, in many peoples’ eyes:

Why Boycotting is Wrong

‘Hypocrite’ Elton John boycotts designers who disagree with him

The Inverted Standard of Censorship

So creating laws to protect civil rights is somehow “destroying businesses”, and people should just go elsewhere if they feel that business is discriminating against them. BUT…if they do that, they’re hypocrites, because THEY’RE discriminating against that business too? Or something.

Did you complain back? “That’s PROOF that you had sex!”

I don’t have to overhear this kind of nonsense very often. I have family members who are gay, so family members don’t make these comments. And I live in Massachusetts, where nobody seems to care who’s having sex with whom. (It was so refreshing to move here after living in the south.)

I can’t imagine having to put up with crap for my entire life. I’m sorry.

Not that particular time. But the mindset that anything a gay person does is about sex does truly baffle me.

I wish you all would get it out of your head that being gay is the same as being black. Quit riding their coattails.

Bigotry is remarkably one-dimensional.

It’s the exact same struggle. Blacks had it worse, of course, but it’s still discrimination. Tell me, why do you think you personal opinion (that homosexuality is wrong) should dictate what two consenting adults do that causes no harm to anyone?

Ohhhhhh, I get it. You don’t have a problem with homosexuality. You have a problem with homosexuals equating their struggle as somewhat akin to the black struggle for equal rights in the US. Got it…:eek:

The fight for civil rights is different from the current debate on businesses catering gay events. Civil rights was a battle against prejudice.

There are many people with very strong religious beliefs that are being forced to participate in something they feel is morally wrong. People of religious faith deserve equal protection under the law. They are citizens of this country too.

Serving the public in a restaurant is different from catering. Catering is a much more personal service. They are an integral part of the event. There’s travel involved, setting up the equipment and tables, wait staff etc. Then clean up afterward.

It seems like there should be a middle ground here. That, yes people can live their lives however they want. Regardless of sexuality. But don’t force that lifestyle on anyone else. The owners of businesses shouldn’t be forced to compromise their religious beliefs. Religious belief and values are different from prejudice. Not liking someone’s lifestyle is not an excuse for rejecting their business.

People in the pre-civil rights era had strongly held beliefs, too. Many believed that God has created distinct races for a purpose, and that meant that God wanted the different races to live separately. They believed that interracial marriage went against God’s will that there be different races, and that God looks benevolently on those who maintain the racial purity that he created. In this mindset, interracial marriage was considered and affront to God. And they, too, had Bible passages to back it up.

The slightly-more-progressive believed that segregation was a regional social custom that did not lead to any real harm. They believed that it would take time to change attitudes, and that it was important not to push social change too quickly on a resistant older generation. They believed that something like equality was most likely to emerge from working within the existing framework and not pushing people too hard.

And we had the same arguments back then. Bob Jones University was denied tax except status because they prohibited interracial dating, making them an ineligible “racist organization.” They, too argued religious freedom based on a “sincerely held belief”. And everyone was up in arms about how this was critical to religious freedom in our country.

It’s the same damn thing. Literally exactly the same. Oddly, Christianity managed to get over the “race mixing offends God” thing pretty darn quickly, and they will get over this in the same way. This isn’t going to be nearly as traumatic as they think.

Well, I remember when cops used to go to the parking lots of gay bars, write down the license plates of people in those bars, and contact the employers and families of those bar patrons to make sure they knew thos people were GAY FORNICATOR DRINKERS!

And then the gay person risked losing their job (and being unable to get another one, because there were no laws against an employer saying “Oh, Bob? He’s gay, and you know how they are, we don’t believe in that here!”), having their family members find out, and having friends find out. Gay people lost a LOT. That’s one reason that so many left their hometowns and moved to cities.

This was as recent as the 1980s, so it’s not exactly ancient history.

And this happened to friends and family, people I care deeply for. I don’t intend to stand by and let someone’s religion (which we cannot really prove the validity of) trump the right for a person to live with dignity in**** this **life.

In case anyone missed it, the linked site is satirical. From their About page:

The two bolded sentences are contradictory. Can you clarify further?


Well, ignorance fought. :slight_smile:

A person’s religious beliefs may require him/her to make certain decisions. Like not catering a gay wedding because it conflicts with their beliefs of marriage.

Its not personal. They don’t necessarily hate the person or even gay people in general. It would vary from situation to situation. But I don’t assume any hatred or prejudice unless the people are quoted saying negative stuff. The belief that marriage is between a man and a woman doesn’t equal hate for gays. At least it shouldn’t.

If you don’t want people “imposing their sexuality on you”, then why in the Nine Hells would you go into the wedding-planning business? That’s a job that’s literally impossible to do without getting your clients’ sexuality “imposed on you”.

Wait, what’s that? It’s OK when heterosexuals wear their sexuality on their sleeve, but it’s not OK when homosexuals do it? And just what should we call that attitude?

So is this.

They’re being discriminatory towards another citizen. Their religion doesn’t protect them from equal rights provisions.

Oh, please.

Religious beliefs that are exclusionary define prejudice and bigotry. Hating in the name of your god is still hating.

I have minimal problem with people’s sincere religious beliefs directing their actions, most of the time. I do have a problem when they define their bigotry and irrational beliefs as “religious,” giving a legal-proof excuse to do something that most people class as blind hate.

I know the race analogy is probably tiresome, but it is so very apt that I don’t think it will go away, so…

If a person’s religious beliefs require him to make certain decisions such as refusing to cater an interracial wedding, because that conflicts with their belief, is that ok?

And would it be in any way reasonable to say “the belief that marriage should be between two people the same colour doesnt equal racism. At least it shouldn’t” ?

I don’t believe either statement is defensible in either case; race or sexuality. The civilised world seems to be in agreement when the factor is race, but for no good reason at all, when the factor is sexuality, it’s debatable? Preposterous.